The S.C. Department of Health and Environmental Control held a public hearing to discuss the proposed discharge permit for Duke Energy's William States Lee III Nuclear Station in Cherokee County. DHEC representatives discussed the permit issues and members of the public, including Mack Davis, of Cherokee County, were allowed to voice their concerns, during the hearing held at Encounter Church in Gaffney, Thursday evening.

Published: Thursday, April 4, 2013 at 9:57 p.m.

Last Modified: Thursday, April 4, 2013 at 9:57 p.m.

GAFFNEY — Several people at a public hearing Thursday urged officials with the state Department of Health and Environmental Control to deny a permit regulating wastewater discharge from a proposed nuclear power plant in Cherokee County.

Around 60 people attended the hearing. Local residents, as well as people from North Carolina and outside the immediate area, asked questions and commented after a presentation. All but one voiced concerns and opposition to the draft permit for Duke Energy's proposed William States Lee III Nuclear Station.

The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit, or NPDES, would regulate “discharges of cooling tower blowdown, and effluent from wastewater treatment systems including water treatment waste, floor and equipment drains, and other small waste streams from one discharge point to the Broad River at the 99 Islands Reservoir.”

The permit is for a term of five years.

Several people spoke on behalf of environmental advocacy groups.

Those opposed to the permit had many concerns: the amount of water that would be drawn from the Broad River to support the nuclear station, pollutants that would be discharged, the impact of heated water on aquatic life and how often wastewater would be monitored.

Some questioned the data in the draft permit.

Randy Thompson, DHEC permit engineer, said in a presentation that Duke has proposed to install two nuclear reactors. The main issues with the NPDES permit, he said, is at what rate and how much water could be pulled from the Broad River and the amount of pollutants that could be discharged into the river in a “protective manner.”

The main discharge, called cooling tower blowdown, would come from the cooling towers. That would comprise about 98 percent of the discharge, while the remaining two percent is wastewater, Thompson said.

There are two ponds on the proposed nuclear power plant site. Duke has proposed to build a third pond, Thompson said. He said the Broad River and ponds would be a source of cooling water. In times of drought and when the river flow is low, Thompson said Duke would be able to draw cooling water from the ponds, which would be replenished as water levels allowed.

Wastewater would discharge on the upstream side of the 99 Islands dam, he said.

Thompson said the primary section of intake has capacity of up to 98 cubic feet per second, or about 50 million gallons per day. He said that was five percent of the mean annual flow of the river over the last 10 years. Thompson said under normal operations, Duke would withdraw about 78 cubic feet per second of water. Millions of gallons would be returned to the river as discharge, but more would evaporate from the cooling towers, he explained.

The heated water that would be discharged also is an environmental issue.

The draft permit allows Duke to discharge 95-degree water from June through September and 90 degrees from October to May, Thompson said.

He said radioactivity is not regulated under the permit since federal law prohibits states from regulating radioactivity, which is regulated by U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Duke would be required to test the overall toxicity of wastewater every month.

Several members of the public did not think that monthly testing was sufficient. They also called for more hearings and sessions to ask questions.

Others thought that nuclear energy was simply unsafe and voiced support of alternative energy resources, such as solar and wind.

There also was concern of human error that could result in devastating consequences.

One asked the age of the 99 Islands dam where water would be discharged. Thompson said the dam was built in the early 1900s.

“The Broad River is a blessing because it supplies water — and all living things, plant or animal, must have water to survive,” Jan Hammett said.

She said people are confident that water will come in an “unending supply.”

Hammett said it would be “short sighted” to permit “heated, toxic water” to be discharged into the water and downstream to people who rely on the river to supply drinking water.

“The only nuclear reactor that I trust is 93 million miles away from me — the sun,” Hammett said.

Louis Zeller with the Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League said the amount of water that would be withdrawn is “unconscionable” amid droughts and global warming.

Clare Hanrahan with S.A.F.E. (Safe Alternatives for Future Energy) Carolinas told people at the hearing that they were responsible for the well-being of future generations “How dare we even consider compromising water quality … we should be grieving what's going on here,” she said.

Not all opposed the permit.

Brenda Earls of Gaffney said water is a precious resource and thought the hearing was beneficial and answered many concerns. She expressed hope that Duke would form a committee with environmental advocacy groups and concerned citizens.

She urged people to come together, find common ground and find solutions.

Earls said the United States is competing on a global scale. As communities grow, so do their energy needs. She said nobody wants a nuclear power plant and said they also didn't want other energy sources in their backyard, such as pipelines or wind turbines.

“We need the power. We need this here,” Earls said.

DHEC spokesman Jim Beasley said the agency would continue to gather input from the public and staff would consider it as the agency determined one of three options: the permit could be formally issued as it's written, DHEC make changes to the permit, or deny the permit, based on what they learn.

“We believe that we've constructed a permit at this point that's very sound and is capable of sustainment,” Beasley said.

Beasley said the NPDES permit was one step in the process toward Duke Energy potentially opening a nuclear power plant. Duke must obtain several permits from different agencies before it could open the plant.

Written comments will be accepted until the close of business on April 19. They can be submitted by mail to Randy Thompson, SCDHEC/Bureau of Water, 2600 Bull Street, Columbia, S.C., 29201, or by e-mail at randy.thompson@dhec.sc.gov.

<p>GAFFNEY — Several people at a public hearing Thursday urged officials with the state Department of Health and Environmental Control to deny a permit regulating wastewater discharge from a proposed nuclear power plant in Cherokee County.</p><p>Around 60 people attended the hearing. Local residents, as well as people from North Carolina and outside the immediate area, asked questions and commented after a presentation. All but one voiced concerns and opposition to the draft permit for Duke Energy's proposed William States Lee III Nuclear Station.</p><p>The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit, or NPDES, would regulate “discharges of cooling tower blowdown, and effluent from wastewater treatment systems including water treatment waste, floor and equipment drains, and other small waste streams from one discharge point to the Broad River at the 99 Islands Reservoir.”</p><p>The permit is for a term of five years.</p><p>Several people spoke on behalf of environmental advocacy groups.</p><p>Those opposed to the permit had many concerns: the amount of water that would be drawn from the Broad River to support the nuclear station, pollutants that would be discharged, the impact of heated water on aquatic life and how often wastewater would be monitored.</p><p>Some questioned the data in the draft permit.</p><p>Randy Thompson, DHEC permit engineer, said in a presentation that Duke has proposed to install two nuclear reactors. The main issues with the NPDES permit, he said, is at what rate and how much water could be pulled from the Broad River and the amount of pollutants that could be discharged into the river in a “protective manner.”</p><p>The main discharge, called cooling tower blowdown, would come from the cooling towers. That would comprise about 98 percent of the discharge, while the remaining two percent is wastewater, Thompson said.</p><p>There are two ponds on the proposed nuclear power plant site. Duke has proposed to build a third pond, Thompson said. He said the Broad River and ponds would be a source of cooling water. In times of drought and when the river flow is low, Thompson said Duke would be able to draw cooling water from the ponds, which would be replenished as water levels allowed.</p><p>Wastewater would discharge on the upstream side of the 99 Islands dam, he said.</p><p>Thompson said the primary section of intake has capacity of up to 98 cubic feet per second, or about 50 million gallons per day. He said that was five percent of the mean annual flow of the river over the last 10 years. Thompson said under normal operations, Duke would withdraw about 78 cubic feet per second of water. Millions of gallons would be returned to the river as discharge, but more would evaporate from the cooling towers, he explained.</p><p>The heated water that would be discharged also is an environmental issue.</p><p>The draft permit allows Duke to discharge 95-degree water from June through September and 90 degrees from October to May, Thompson said. </p><p>He said radioactivity is not regulated under the permit since federal law prohibits states from regulating radioactivity, which is regulated by U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.</p><p>Duke would be required to test the overall toxicity of wastewater every month.</p><p>Several members of the public did not think that monthly testing was sufficient. They also called for more hearings and sessions to ask questions.</p><p>Others thought that nuclear energy was simply unsafe and voiced support of alternative energy resources, such as solar and wind.</p><p>There also was concern of human error that could result in devastating consequences. </p><p>One asked the age of the 99 Islands dam where water would be discharged. Thompson said the dam was built in the early 1900s.</p><p>“The Broad River is a blessing because it supplies water — and all living things, plant or animal, must have water to survive,” Jan Hammett said.</p><p>She said people are confident that water will come in an “unending supply.” </p><p>Hammett said it would be “short sighted” to permit “heated, toxic water” to be discharged into the water and downstream to people who rely on the river to supply drinking water.</p><p>“The only nuclear reactor that I trust is 93 million miles away from me — the sun,” Hammett said. </p><p>Louis Zeller with the Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League said the amount of water that would be withdrawn is “unconscionable” amid droughts and global warming.</p><p>Clare Hanrahan with S.A.F.E. (Safe Alternatives for Future Energy) Carolinas told people at the hearing that they were responsible for the well-being of future generations “How dare we even consider compromising water quality … we should be grieving what's going on here,” she said.</p><p>Not all opposed the permit.</p><p>Brenda Earls of Gaffney said water is a precious resource and thought the hearing was beneficial and answered many concerns. She expressed hope that Duke would form a committee with environmental advocacy groups and concerned citizens.</p><p>She urged people to come together, find common ground and find solutions.</p><p>Earls said the United States is competing on a global scale. As communities grow, so do their energy needs. She said nobody wants a nuclear power plant and said they also didn't want other energy sources in their backyard, such as pipelines or wind turbines.</p><p>“We need the power. We need this here,” Earls said.</p><p>DHEC spokesman Jim Beasley said the agency would continue to gather input from the public and staff would consider it as the agency determined one of three options: the permit could be formally issued as it's written, DHEC make changes to the permit, or deny the permit, based on what they learn.</p><p>“We believe that we've constructed a permit at this point that's very sound and is capable of sustainment,” Beasley said.</p><p>Beasley said the NPDES permit was one step in the process toward Duke Energy potentially opening a nuclear power plant. Duke must obtain several permits from different agencies before it could open the plant.</p><p>Written comments will be accepted until the close of business on April 19. They can be submitted by mail to Randy Thompson, SCDHEC/Bureau of Water, 2600 Bull Street, Columbia, S.C., 29201, or by e-mail at randy.thompson@dhec.sc.gov.</p><p>For more information, visit: http://www.scdhec.gov/.</p>